To understand whether an individual is honest, we need to know whether that person is committed to alternation of power, whether he understands the value of inclusivity and dissent, whether he knows that people with different ideas live within the same society, and whether he is willing to let them survive, grow, and challenge him.
The question isn't whether Bangladesh made the tactically perfect decision. The question is whether middle powers everywhere -- in cricket, in trade, in international relations -- are ready to stop performing compliance and start building alternatives. That's what sovereignty looks like when the old order collapses and the new one hasn't been built yet.
Televised debates won't solve every problem with Bangladesh's political discourse. They won't eliminate partisanship or guarantee honesty. But they offer something increasingly rare: a structured opportunity for truth-testing, where claims meet challenges and voters can judge for themselves.
Where does the Awami League stand today, 18 months after the July Uprising, and is there any way back for the party post-February 12?
Why “Bangladesh First” Is Coherent Politics and “We Are the People” Is a Theological Trap for Jamaat. The first is a moral ordering principle which prioritizes responsibility. The second is a sovereignty claim and defines power.
What if Bangladesh's problem isn't the divides themselves? Secular versus religious. Bengali versus Muslim. Shahbag versus Shapla. Aspiration versus stagnation. What if the real problem is our inability to tolerate disagreement at all?
This is not peace. And it is not war. It is the controlled demolition of the Sykes-Picot agreement in favour of an integrated Middle East. Iran is reshaping its internal power structure and regional posture. The Middle East is not descending into chaos. It is being reorganized.
As with the constitution, good principles can only help if properly applied in practice. In the long run, the verdict of history on the interim government will depend on the ability of its successors
In a riverine land such as ours, mainstream might be a more evocative term -- BNP represents the confluence of various cultural, historical, social milieus that continue to flow through us. As Mrs Zia has memorably put it, BNP situates itself to the left of the right, and to the right of the left.
As the nation approaches another election marked by controversy and uncertainty, the composition of its candidate list serves as both a warning and a mirror. It reveals not only who seeks power, but why they seek it.
Echoes of the 1979 Islamic Revolution are loud and clear, except this time the ayatollahs are on the receiving end. To save this nation from calamity, it’s time for Khamenei to leave.
The deepest fault line is not between secular and religious, or even between rival nationalisms. It is between a society that aspires and a system that no longer feels responsive. Whoever speaks to this issue will have the heart of the Bangladeshi voter.
The Jagannath University election, therefore, is not merely a matter of victory or defeat. It raises a deeper question -- what lessons will political parties draw from the changing realities of student politics? That, more than the numbers themselves, is the most critical issue going forward.
As we enter the final phase before elections Jamaat-e-Islami may be poised to win far more votes than previously predicted. There is still time for BNP to regain the momentum if it appreciates the situation and pivots accordingly. But there is little evidence that it does so.
The right to live in peace is not a gift from empires. It is a demand, shouted into the barrels of their guns. It is a world, built stone by stone, in the ruins they leave behind.
